Opinion on electronic markers in Milsim?

I've played in a couple of milsim games with my empire axe alongside players who have used tippmann a-5's and x7's with tac-caps. Very rarely have I run into any issue with this awesome group of ballers; however as of late I have been getting some flak about using my marker while participating in a few milsim games away from my local area. Understandably the players there believe that my gun's higher rate of fire gives me at an unfair advantage. I can agree/disagree with this statement and would just like to state that I adjust the fire-mode on my gun to semi automatic capped at 10bps to try and keep things fair. However, I wanted to get a general conscious as to what the majority of the milsim community thinks about electronic gun use. What is your personal opinion on the subject?

True milsim (Military Simulation) is a very small area of paintball where the players attempt to use similar 'weapons' and 'tactics' as military... Tac vests, mag fed, and strict movement diciplin are the norm...

In this strict interpretation of the game of paintball an electro would be a big no.

Woods ball often sees a lot of people that are half way milsim and half way rec ball. they use tippmans or other semi milsim looking guns that still have 200rnd hoppers and such...many of these guns are equipped with E triggers or RT triggers capable of high and sustained rates of fire.

I see absolutely NO issue in using your electro in the woods! Why not? They are lighter, more efficent, often easier to shoot...They just don't 'look' the same...

On another note, If players are complaning about higher rate of fire issues, it could be two things.
1) a lack of understanding of how an electro can be programmed or
2) Maybe you are shooting more than they are even at your 10bps cap?

Either way, This issue could be resolved easily by remaining calm, polite and talking with the other players and working through their issues.

Who knows, maybe you will win some of them over and see more of them pick up an electro?

ok here's my two cents, those players are,for a lack of a better term,pussies, for complaining that they can't keep up with you. Personally I've played against speedball players with a mag fed marker and was able to keep up with them,now keep in mind my shots were more limited but that was the fun of the challenge. What do you think a solider with limited ammo put up against a enemy with a high capcity rifle or gun thinks in the heat of the battle? move forward and take out that enemy. My philosophy about a med fed player put up against normal makers is move like your on a airball field and fire like a woods ball player,getting the advantage on the other person who uses distance to stop your team from advancing and making your shots count to take the enemy out. And yes WCP_Kraken,the dam is a wonderful piece of art.

Aren't the BT TM-7 and TM-15 milsim bodies with axe or mini internals? I honestly don't see a prob mixing space gun bodies with milsim bodies, if you're shooting semi they should be happy with that since you can get e grips for most hopper fed milsim guns on the market

I would agree with the above. The group that is complaining is just inexperienced and think that high volumes of fire is impossible to overcome. A simple conversation would prove useful to explain how it all works and that there isn't anything wrong with it.

What I would do in that case is swap gear with the complainers for a round or two and prove that the electro gun isn't the deal maker in your gameplay. They will also come to find out the same eventually I would imagine, although their first initial thoughts may be that your gun is far more superior just because of impressions. But by offering to swap gear, it will show that you aren't a self centered bigot and that you place more importance into the friendly competitive nature of the game.

One thing I'll add is that there does seem to be a sort of bias against electro markers in milsim. Like they're somehow not "pure". I've had plenty to say about this in the past - imo electro technology is great and the more we see it appearing in milsim markers (at least as an option) the better.

One thing I'll add is that there does seem to be a sort of bias against electro markers in milsim. Like they're somehow not "pure". I've had plenty to say about this in the past - imo electro technology is great and the more we see it appearing in milsim markers (at least as an option) the better.

I agree. The one and only thing I would ever want is eyes for my MKPII. Kind of a bummer they didn't have eyes as an option just in case you didn't want the cyclone, like going magfed for example.

I haven't used a lok-bolt gun, but in theory it seems like a pretty slick concept. One thing I'd be worried about is long term use, and how it would affect the internals.

Having the bolt be suddenly stopped part way through its cycle seems like it would add unnecessary wear and tear on the internal systems over time. But as its relatively new still I'm guessing this is just something we'll have to wait and see.

As it sits, the Lok Bolt has a "lever" that props itself in the way of the bolt. Exactly how much room there is between the two, I am not too sure, but I can't imagine it would be much at all to reduce wear and tear. When a ball is fully seated in the chamber, this lever is pushed away and the bolt will be allowed to fire. So in a way, it is a mechanical set of eyes that function much in the same way. This system just alters where the intervention occurs. Eyes intervene before the trigger can activate, and the Lok Bolt happens afterwards.

I plan on getting one for my MKPII after the holidays, so I can let you know from peronal experience then.

Eyes prevent the cycle from even starting. The Lok-bolt stops the bolt while its already in motion. And the bolt is connected to the hammer, etc. Just seems like the potential there is higher for technical issues.

I'm aware of how it works, good point about the mechanical stuff to go wrong factor. I suppose I'm wondering how reliable etc it is in practice vs eyes. It would certainly be less good in certain respects.

One difference would be missed shots. If you're shooting say triple burst and electro eyes engage due to a slow feed, they simply delay the shot a few milliseconds until the ball is seated. You still get your burst and probably won't notice the difference. With a lokbolt on the other hand that shot will be missed altogether, potentially costing you a kill.

One question I have about the lok-bolt that I haven't found an answer for yet is what happens when the lock engages. Do you have to manually charge the gun again? Or does the bolt/hammer reset on its own after hitting the lok?

Depends on the marker. On the 468: yes, you have to charge again. So you'll be charging every mag unless you count shots. On an MKP2 the answer is no, due to a different drivetrain that doesn't mind the bolt being stopped. That's the main reason I prefer the MKP2 over a 468.

Afaik the lokbolt is only available for those two markers.

A proper eye system is still superior like on the DAM. The price, efficiency and lack of continuous feed mags or airstocks is the problem there. Hopefully we'll start to see cheaper magfed markers with eyes. A well priced ion engine type system supporting dmags from a company like GoG would be excellent.

I think the real only rule to Milsim is limited ammo….
the is no FairPlay on a real battlefield, forces uses whatever weapons & tactics that work. In reality no gun has 200 rounds loaded and no person carries 1000s (guess there is some exceptions). Sure further rules etc can make it fun but can also just be a case of elitism.